On 07/03/2015 06:44 PM, Emil Velikov wrote:
On 01/07/15 12:37, Tapani Pälli wrote:
(We need this include in porting changes for the OpenGL ES
conformance suite.)
Signed-off-by: Tapani Pälli <tapani.palli@xxxxxxxxx>
---
intel/intel_bufmgr.h | 8 ++++++++
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/intel/intel_bufmgr.h b/intel/intel_bufmgr.h
index 285919e..f061454 100644
--- a/intel/intel_bufmgr.h
+++ b/intel/intel_bufmgr.h
@@ -38,6 +38,10 @@
#include <stdint.h>
#include <stdio.h>
+#if defined(__cplusplus) || defined(c_plusplus)
+extern "C" {
+#endif
+
Strongly in favour - I've been pondering on this for a very long time.
Just a question - is there a compiler that care about (something from
the last decade) that does not define __cplusplus but c_plusplus ?
I don't know, this was just copy paste from other file.
Afaict the former is defined since (at least) the 1998 C++ standard,
while the latter is extremely rare, and mostly mentioned as decrecated.
For me it is ok to drop c_plusplus, no strong opinion.
-Emil
// Tapani
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
